NEH Offers Virtual Grant Workshops
Join a live virtual workshop with National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) program staff to hear about NEH grant opportunities, deadlines, and application information.
Reminder UF COE: College Research Incentive Fund 2021-22 Applications Due April 19
All tenured and tenure-track faculty who are not, at the time of the CRIF submission, serving as principal investigator (PI) or Co-PI of a federally funded project are eligible to apply. Each eligible faculty may be an applicant on only one CRIF application. Please submit an application electronically in a single-file PDF to research@coe.ufl.edu by 5 pm on April 19, 2021.
UF Artificial Intelligence Town Hall
Please save the date for the next AI Town Hall May 13, 2021 from 9am–noon. The agenda will include updates in AI research, courses & programs, faculty and student training, and the upcoming NVIDIA AI Technology Center.
UF IRB Best Practices: Documents and Changes
The UF Institutional Review Board (IRB) receives approximately 3,000 new submissions and 5,000 revisions annually. The UF IRB staff and reviewers work hard to make sure that each submission is carefully and efficiently evaluated, but there are things you can do to help.
- Be sure documents are in Word (.doc or .docx) format.
- Use Track Changes when making updates to documents.
UF IRB Best Practices: The Revision Smart Form
Submitting revisions in myIRB is more than just modifying your study. The UF IRB offers tips from IRB staff for filling out the out the myIRB Revision Smart Form. The first two Smart Form questions are about getting the reviewer(s) the information needed to quickly process your submission. Typically, providing more details here means a more efficient review.
UF IRB QA/QI Program Team Offers New Tool
Researchers and study staff, please be on the lookout for a new tool from the UF Institutional Review Board (IRB) Quality Assurance/Quality Improvement Program team (UF IRB QA/QI). UF IRB QA/QI will soon be rolling out its Post-Approval Monitoring (PAM) self-assessment survey tool.
While the initial roll-out of the PAM self-assessment survey tool will target greater-than-minimal-risk studies, the tool can be used for any study type and requests from the QA/QI team to conduct self-assessments may extend beyond greater-than-minimal-risk studies.
In addition to QA/QI-requested PAM assessments, the PAM survey tool (Word document) is also available on the IRB website so that study teams may download and use the tool to conduct self-assessments of any of their studies anytime. The UF IRB encourages researchers to conduct self-assessments at least annually.
Updates to Qualtrics Environment
On March 31, 2021 Qualtrics deployed updates to several areas of the survey tool, improving both the ease of use and accessibility of its features.
There is now a simplified question builder navigation that aligns with the overall Qualtrics user experience. Another significant change: The Survey Editor tool is now called Survey Builder. Some functions were moved during the upgrade but all former capabilities remain. Additionally, the new layout created for Survey Builder is accessibility compliant. A Survey Builder video preview and support page are available from Qualtrics.
Awarded Projects for March 2021
Congratulations to Maureen Conroy for her subcontract award IES Flow Through from Baylor University; Lynda Hayes for her award from the Florida Department of Education; Latoya Haynes Thoby for her award from the American Education Research Association; Philip Poekert, Taryrn Brown, and Chonika Coleman King for their award from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation; and Patricia Snyder for her subcontract award IES Flow Through from the University of Minnesota.
For more details, see the Awarded Projects table.
Submitted Projects for March 2021
Best wishes to Mary Bratsch-Hines for her subcontract proposal IES Flow Through from RTI International; Jing Du, Kent Crippen, Jonathan Adams, and Xiao Yu for their proposal to the National Science Foundation; Maya Israel for her proposal to Google; Kathrin Maki for her proposal to the Society for the Study of School Psychology; Philip Poekert for his proposal to Orange County Public Schools; Paige Pullen for her proposal to Pinellas County; Wanli Xing, Swarup Bhunia, and Mary Jo Koroly for their proposal to the National Security Agency; and Wanli Xing for his proposal to Code for Science and Society.
For more details, see the Submitted Projects table.
COVID-19 Relief Bill Allocates $100 Million to IES for Research Addressing Learning Loss
The U.S. House of Representatives has passed a bill titled H.R.1319 – American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, a $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief package that would appropriate funds for education-related programs, including $100 million for the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) for education grants to carry out research related to addressing learning loss caused by the coronavirus. The Senate has passed its version which maintains this funding and language. The bill must now return to the House for a final vote before being signed into law.
Reminder: OER Offers Resources to Help with IES Cost Analysis
The Office of Educational Research (OER) offers resources on its Cost Analysis webpage to help faculty meet the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) requirement for conducting cost analysis as part of their studies.
IES Hosts On-Demand Webinar Series for Upcoming Funding Opportunities
The Institute of Education Sciences (IES) is hosting a series of on-demand webinars for applicants interested in upcoming funding opportunities. The presentations will be posted on a rolling basis. Some webinar topics include the following:
- IES Basic Overview of Research Grants and Information for New Applicants to IES
- IES Grant Writing Workshop
- IES Application Process
- After Submitting an IES Application
- IES Peer Review Panel Discussion
NSF Offers 5 Tips on How to Work with a Program Officer
Excerpted from NSF Science Matters blog February 23, 2021 by Vincent Tedjasaputra, PhD
Whatever the phase of your research career, it is a good idea to reach out to a National Science Foundation (NSF) program officer as the first step in the NSF application process. Program officers are researchers — experts from the research community who guide grant proposals through Merit Review, part of the process that determines if a proposal is funded. Don’t be intimidated to reach out to a program officer. The myth that reaching out might hinder your chances couldn’t be further from the truth. Here are five tips from NSF program officers to help you work with them:
- Do your homework.
If you don’t know or have a program officer, you can search the NSF funding website using keywords or click through the research areas. Read through relevant policies and solicitations, and search through the NSF awards database for recent awards made. If your research idea spans multiple disciplines, you may explore NSF’s interdisciplinary research opportunities.
- Reach out as early as possible.
Program officers can provide general advice on writing proposals and tell you if your idea is a good fit. They can also tell you how proposals are evaluated, information that can be helpful as you develop your proposal. If your idea doesn’t align with that particular program, program officers can point you toward other contacts and programs that may be a better fit.
- Continue to stay in contact with your program officer.
Regardless of whether your proposal is selected for funding, you should continue to stay in contact with your program officer in the post-review process.
NIH Program Officers Discuss Developing a Research Plan
In the latest All About Grants podcast, National Institutes of Health (NIH) program officers discuss Considerations for Developing a Research Plan, including the relationship between the specific aims and research strategy. They also provide helpful suggestions and share common pitfalls. NIH encourages researchers to contact NIH staff and provides a guide for contacting the right person at each phase of the application and award process.
NIH Provides Video on the Peer Review Process
In a recent National Institutes of Health (NIH) video, NIH Peer Review: “Live” Mock Study Section, NIH scientists gather to review three fictional grant applications in response to a fictional Request for Applications (RFA). The reviewers discuss how applications are scored and what mistakes to avoid in the application.
Contact Us
College of Education140 Norman Hall
PO Box 117040
Gainesville, FL 32611-7044
(352) 392-0726
